LETTER 


TO    THE 


REV,  JOHN  BACHMAN,  D,  D,, 


ON    THE    QUESTION    OK 


HYBR1DITY  IN  ANIMALS. 


CONSIDERED    IN    REFERENCE    TO 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  HUMAN  SPECIES; 


BY  SAMUEL  GEORGE  MORTON,  M.  D. 

Pennsylvania  and  Edinburgh. 


f  Californi 

Regional 

Facility 


CHARLESTON,  S.  C.: 

STEAM-POWER  PRESS  OF  WALKER  <fe  JAMES, 

No.    101    East-Bay, 

1850. 


UCSB  LIBRARY 


LETTER 


TO    THE 


REV.  JOHN  BACHMAN,  D.  D., 


ON    THE    QUESTION    OF 


HYBR1DITY  IN  ANIMALS, 


CONSroERED    IN    REFERENCE   TO 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  HUMAN  SPECKS. 


BY  SAMUEL  GEORGE  MORTON,  M.  D. 

Pennsylvania  and  Edinburgh. 


CHARLESTON,  S.  C.: 

STEAM-POWER  PRESS  OF  "WALKER  &  JAMES, 
No.   101   East-Bay, 

1850. 


LETTER  TO  DR,  BACHMAN, 


PHILADELPHIA,  MARCH  30,  1850. 

Dear  Sir : — Having  read  your  review  of  my  "  Essay  on  Hybridity," 
in  the  last  number  of  this  Journal,  I  feel  called  upon  to  offer  some  ob- 
servations in  reply ;  and  I  take  this  step  with  the  more  pleasure,  because 
it  does  not  appear  to  me  that  you  have  refuted  any  one  of  my  six  pro- 
positions. On  the  contrary,  the  perusal  of  your  criticism  only  confirms 
me  in  them  all. 

Permit  me  to  commence,  by  saying  that  I  fully  reciprocate  the  kind 
sentiments  you  have  expressed  with  respect  to  myself;  for  no  difference 
of  opinion  can  diminish  my  esteem  for  you  as  a  man,  or  lessen  my  admi- 
ration for  one  who,  by  common  consent,  stands  in  the  front  rank  of  Ame- 
rican Zoology.  Yet,  I  cannot  suppress  my  surprise  that  you  should 
reject  all  my  authorities,  because  they  conflict  with  your  own  views  ;  for 
if  such  men  as  Buffon,  Temminck,  Hamilton  Smith,  and  others  whom  I 
have  cited,  are  not  to  be  believed  in  questions  of  science,  then  I  confess 
we  may  as  well  reject  all  human  testimony  at  once,  and  rely,  for  the 
future,  solely  on  our  own  observation;  which,  like  the  others,  and  by  the 
same  rule,  will  in  turn  be  denied  and  discarded  by  those  who  follow  us. 

I  cannot  concur  in  yonr  strictures  on  Hamilton  Smith.  I  see  in  him 
a  man  who  has  grown  gray  in  the  pursuit  of  Science.  He  has  attained 
its  honors,  and  is  deserving  of  the  gratitude  of  the  present  age  and  of 
posterity.  In  fact,  in  the  philosophy  of  Natural  History,  he  appears  to 
me  to  be  a  century  in  advance  of  most  of  his  contemporaries.  If  one 
who  has  accomplished  so  much  has  committed  some  errors  of  judgment, 
let  us  be  gentle  in  our  censure.  Let  us  review  our  own  works  and  see  if 
we  have  done  better.  For  my  own  part,  I  must  confess  to  various  errors 
both  of  fact  and  opinion  ;  and  these  things  have  made  me  more  circum- 
spect in  myself  and  more  charitable  to  others. 
1 


And  here  it  is  necessary  for  me  to  correct  an  impression  of  yours  with 
respect  to  a  passage  of  De  Azzara,  quoted  in  my  essay.  You  have  not 
been  able  to  find  it  in  the  French  edition  ;  but  in  Hunter's  translation, 
London,  1838,  page  173,  after  some  preliminary  observations,  you  will 
see  the  following  paragraph,  which  is  the  one  from  which  mine  was 
abridged : 

"  I  have  heard  that  on  the  plains,  my  black  cat,  the  yayuarundi  and 
the  eyra,  all  unite  with  the  domestic  cat.  From  this  connection  crossed 
breeds  will  necessarily  result ;  and  if,  in  the  course  of  time,  these  coun- 
tries should  become  populous,  and  these  wild-cats,  as  would  infallibly  be 
the  case,  should  be  extirpated,  could  it  then,  with  any  propriety,  be 
affirmed  that  all  the  domestic  races  proceeded  from  one  species  which 
had  remained  wild,  as  the  naturalists  of  the  old  world  maintain  ?M 

I  cite  this  passage  entire  for  several  reasons :  1st.  To  show  that  it 
does  exist  in  De  Azzara ;  2d.  Because  it  proves  him  an  advocate  for  the 
principle  of  fertile  hybridity  ;  and  3d.  Because  it  appears  that  I  had 
attached  too  much  importance  to  the  statement,  inasmuch  as  the  great 
naturalist  does  not  record  the  facts  from  his  personal  knowledge,  but 
merely  on  the  information  of  others,  who  may  possibly  have  been  mis- 
taken. 

I  consider  my  statement  respecting  hybrids  of  the  sheep  and  goat,  to 
be  a  perfectly  authenticated  fact ;  nor  do  I  think  you  justified  in  the  fol- 
lowing expressions  :  ''  The  Journal  des  Savants,  in  which  these  crudities 
are  published,  has  not  reache  1  us  ;  and  as  the  author  states  that  in  or- 
der to  keep  up  the  breed  they  must  resort  to  the  original  stock,  and 
thus  nature  prevents  the  creation  of  a  new  race,  it  is  unnecessary  for  us 
to  hunt  up  and  comment  on  the  authority."  In  what  respect  the  facts 
of  M.  Chevreul  are  crudities,  I  cannot  see ;  and  if  you  were  to  hun  t,  up 
the  authority,  I  think  you  would  find  the  statement  precisely  as  I  have 
given  it.  I  am  the  more  astonished  at  your  summary  disposal  of  M, 
Chevreul's  facts,  inasmuch  as  similar  statements  have  been  on  record  for 
a  century,  and  are  fully  admitted  by  Buffon  ;  and  if  you  will  turn  to 
Cuvier's  description  of  the  genius  Ovis,  you  will  find  him  remark,  in 
reference  to  the  sheep  and  the  goat,  "  the  two  produce  a  prolific  off- 
spring ;"  and  for  this  very  reason,  as  would  appear,  he  considers  them 
to  be  but  slightly  entitled  to  a  generic  separation.  Did  it  never  occur 
to  you,  when  you  journeyed  ten  miles  of  your  road  to  see  "  a  large 
ram  with  a  hairy  fleece  and  rather  strait  horns,"  that  the  animal  was  a 
cross-breed  of  the  very  kind  of  which  we  have  just  spoken  ? 

There  are  some  questions  in  science  that   must  always  remain  a  mat- 


ter  of  opinion;  and  among  these  is  the  origin  of  the  domestic  sheep ; 
some  referring  all  its  varieties  to  the  Aryali,  (Ovis  ammon,)  others  to 
the  Moufflon,  (Ovis  musmon  ;)  and  the  great  Cuvier  seems  not  to 
have  made  up  his  opinion  on  this  point ;  for  he  says,  "  it  is  supposed 
that  from  the  Moufflon,  or  from  the  Argali,  are  derived  the  innumerable 
races  of  our  woolly  animals."  You  remark,  that  "  it  remains  for  our 
opponents  to  prove  that  our  different  varieties  of  sheep  have  been  de- 
rived from  commingled  species."  Permit  me  to  say  that  I  believe  it 
equally  difficult  to  prove  the  converse  of  this  proposition  ;  for  even  those 
naturalists  who  consider  them  all  as  the  descendants  of  one  species,  re- 
fer us  to  at  least  two  distinct  species  for  the  origin  of  the  race. 

1  stand  corrected  with  respect  to  the  Capra  cegagrus,  which  is  by 
general  consent  admitted  to  be  the  source  of  the  common  goat ;  but 
look  into  Cuvier,  genus  CAPRA,  and  you  will  there  observe  that  he  de- 
cribes  two  very  distinct  species,  the  C.  ibex  and  C.  caucasica  ;  and  he 
concludes  his  remarks  in  these  words :  "  The  two  species  mix  with  the 
domestic  goat."  He  further  states,  in  some  preceding  remarks,  that 
"  there  is  a  race  of  goats  in  upper  Egypt,  with  short  hair,  convex  chauf- 
rin,  and  projecting  lower  jaw,  which  possibly  is  hybrid."  In  these  ex- 
amples Cuvier  sustains  Hamilton  Smith. 

Your  remarks  upon  the  hybrid  between  the  Finland  ram  and  Sar- 
dinian doe,  are  of  the  dogmatical  class ;  and  so  also  those  respecting 
the  Camel*.  The  best  Zoologists,  with  Cuvier  at  the  head  of  them,  di- 
vide the  camels  into  two  sixties.  This  authority  is  sufficient  for  me,  and 
[  have  always  adopted  it.  Btiffou  and  others,  you  remark,  have  re- 
garded them  "  only  as  varieties  of  the  same  species."  I  will  give  you 
the  reason  of  Buffon's  opinion.  He  maintained  the  postulate  of  Ray, — 
"  any  two  animals  that  can  procreate  together,  and  whose  issue  can 
procreate,  are  specifically  the  same."  Now,  since  the  two  camels  produce, 
inter  se,  a  mixed  offspring,  he  for  that  reason  and  for  that  alone,  referred 
them  to  the  same  species.  The  following  are  his  words,  which  I  trans- 
late as  literally  as  possible  : 

"  The  two  kinds  of  Camel  produce  together,  and  the  individuals  de- 
rived from  this  cross  possess  more  vigor  than  the  original  stocks,  and  are 
consequently  more  highly  valued  than  the  others.  These  hybrids,  the 
issue  of  the  dromedary  and  the  camel,  constitute  a  secondary  race  which 
is  equally  prolific,  (qui  se  multiplie  pareillement)  and  mixes  with  the 
primitive  races."* 

Buffou  was  a  most  industrious  and  at  the  same  time  a  very  cautious, 
and  I  may  add,  conscientious  collector  of  facts  ;  but  like  other  men  of 

*  Buffon,  Hist  Naturelle  :  ed  Sonnini,  T.  xxix,  v.  5,  8. 


genius,  he  sometimes  erred  in  opinion  for  the  sake  of  hypothesis ;  and 
the  justice  of  this  remark  may  be  shown  by  a  single  example.  The 
great  naturalist  absolutely  classed  -all  the  ox-tribe  into  one  species  be- 
cause they  were  capable  of  re-producing  among  themselves  a  hybrid 
offspring  thet  could  perpetuate  itself  by  union  with  the  parent  stocks! 
And  in  this  category  he  includes  the  domestic  cattle,  the  ox  of  Europe,  that 
of  Asia  and  Africa,  the  Bison  of  America,  the  auroch  and  the  zebu  !* 
So  completely  was  Buffon  blinded  by  this  hypothesis,  that  it  led  him 
into  errors  of  judgment  in  which  he  is  not  sustained  by  a  single  zoolo- 
gist of  the  present  day. 

In  another  place  you  take  exception  to  my  remark  that  the  fecundity 
of  the  progeny  of  the  horse  and  the  ass  "  depends  much  on  tempera- 
ture," and  you  add  a  doubt  whether  these  phenomena  occur  more  fre- 
quently in  hot  than  in  cold  climates.  Mules  have  been  most  fertile  in 
St.  Domingo,  Spain,  Italy  and  New  Holland.  "  Ces  faits,  qui  me  para- 
issent  bien  constate*s,  nous  demontrent  que,  dans  les  climats  chauds,  la 
mule  peut  non  settlement  concevoir,  mais  perfection ner  et  porter  a  ter- 
me  son  fruit."f 

While  on  this  subject  I  may  add  the  remarkable  fact,  that  in  the  city 
of  Valencia,  in  Spain,  a  horse  and  she  mule  produced  colts  on  five  dif- 
ferent occasions ;  and  the  same  mule  subsequently  bore  another  colt  by 
another  horse.J 

I  regret  to  observe  that  when'l  quote  Prof.  Owen  for  the  fact  of  a 
mule  between  a  bull  and  a  sheep,§  you  quote  the  adverse  opinion  of 
that  distingushed  man  on  the  question  of  fertile  hybridity,  just  as  if  such 
an  opinion  would  do  away  with  the  fact  which  he  had  himself  recorded. 
In  the  passage  quoted  from  Prof.  Owen  he  observes  that  "  the  individ- 
uals of  different  species  do  not  voluntarily  copulate." 

This  statement  only  goes  to  prove  the  correctness  of  the  proverbial  say- 
ing that  a  man  cannot  be  equally  great  in  every  thing;  for  while  naturalists, 

*  Opus  citat.  Tome  xxix,  p.  120,  124,  137,  153. 

f  Buffon,  ut  supra  T.  xxii,  p.  421.  For  the  fact  of  the  prolific  character  of  the 
mule  in  New  Holland,  see  also  Trans,  of  Entomolug  Soc.  of  London,  I,  p.  267. 

\  Buffon,  op.  citat.  T.  xxix,  p.  577. 

§  Dr.  Shaw,  in  his  travels  Jn  Algiers,  states  that  he  saw  the  hybrid  offspring^  of 
an  ass  and  a  cow.  He  describes  it  as  a  small  animal,  with  the  head  and  tail  of 
the  cow,  but  with  a  solid  foot  like  the  ass,  and  destitute  of  horns.  This  cross  is 
called  by  the  French  jumar,  and  is  said  to  have  repeatedly  occurred  in  Southern 
France.  Another  hybrid  bearing  the  same  name  is  declared  to  have  been  more 
than  once  derived  from  the  bull  and  she  ass. — Sonini,  in  Buffon,  xxii.  p.  449. 


by  common  consent,  admit  Professor  Owen  to  be  the  lineal  heir  of  the 
mantle  of  Cuvier,  it  is  also  manifest  that  some  persons  have  enquired 
into  the  present  subject  more  deeply  than  that  eminent  naturalist  has^ 
done.     Independently  of  the  evidence  derived  from  the  family  of  birds    - 
(which  will  be  stated  hereafter)  that  difterent  species  of  animals  do  vol- 
untarily unite  even  in  the  wild  state,  I  will  now  !_m<-  some  examples  from 
the  mammiferous  class. 

Sir  W.  Jardine,  speaking  of  the  domestic  cat,  has  the  following  para-  jt 
graph  : 

,JU 

"We  have  no  doubt  that  since  its  (tin-  K^\ptian  calif"  introduction 
into  Great  Britain  and  more  particularly  to  the  north  of  Scotland,  there 
has  been  occasional  crossing  with  our  own  native  ^pecu-s,  and  that  the 
results  of  these  crosses  have  been  kept  in  our  houses.  We  have  seen 
many  cats  closely  resembling  the  wild  cat,  and  one  or  two  that  were 
very  tame,  which  could  scarcely  be  distinguished  from  it,"* 

Bewick  also  observes,  that  the  wild  eat  of  Europe  (Felis  cattus)  is  said 
not  unfrequently  to  cross  with  the  common  cat.  which  last  rears  a  family; 
and  he  adds,  that  this  explains  the  not  unusual  resemblance  of  the  tame 
to  the  wild  species.f  Xor  does  it  seem  that  these  hybrids  are  any 
less  prolific  than  the  parent  stocks. 

Cuvier  himself  suggests  that  the  Bos  frontalis  of  Lambert,  a  domes- 
tic breed  of  cattle  in  the  north-west  of  India,  may  be  descended  from  a 
union  of  the  buffalo  (Bos  bubalus)  the  indigenus  animal  of  that  coun-     • 
try,  and  the  common  species.J     Thus  Cuvier  suspects  the  Bos  fronta 
now  so  numerous  in  Hindostan,  to  be  a  prolific  hybrid  ;  and  k'may 
relevantly  added  that  the  same  great  naturalist  records 
that  the  singular  varieties  of  the  domestic  pigeon  an-  -l.'ri\ 
from  one  species,  the  columba  livia,  but  that  theyvMBg^ 
union  of  that  species  with  another  but  unknown  "'r3|9H 

Buffon  states  that  in  Champagne,  in  the  year  1^9^  e%n"t  young 
wolves  were  found,  which  were  satisfactorily  traced  to  the  parentage  of  a 
common  dog  and  she  wolf.  They  were  all  killed  wild  in  the  forest, 
while  young ;  thus  preventing  any  chance  of  their  re-producing  among 
themselves.  A  wild  cross  was  also  found  near  Metz,  in  the  year  1784  ; 
and  another  in  Normandy  ten  years  earlier.§ 

The  ancients  averred,  without  hesitation,  that  the  dog,  in  some  coun- 

*  Naturalist's  Library,  voL  ii,  p.  243.     Felinae. 

f  Quadrupeds,  p.  228. 

\  Animal  Kingdom,  I.  p.  201. 

§  Buffon  op.  citat.  xxxii.,  p.  231,  329,  333. 


8 

tries  and  under  some  circumstances,  was  accustomed  to  breed  with  the 
wolf  and  fox.  "In  Cyrenensi  agro,"  says  Aristotle,  "lupi  cum  canibus 
coeunt ;  et  laconici  canes  ex  vulpe  et  cane  generantur."* 

These  and  many  other  examples  quoted  by  Buffon  and  Sonnini,  estab- 
lish two  propositions  :  1st.  That  certain  different  species  of  animals 
copulate  voluntarily  with  each  other ;  and  2d.  That  new  races  have 
been  formed  by  the  union  of  such  species. 

Some  remarkable  confirmations  of  these  principles  will  be  adduced 
hereafter,  when  adverting  to  the  bird-hybrids. 

In  the  next  place,  I  observe  with  surprise  that  your  review  of  my  essay 
extends  no  farther  than  the  marnmiferous  class.  Why  were  not  the 
birds  examined  also  ?  For  here  the  evidence  is  even  stronger,  and  I  pre- 
sume will  not  and  cannot  be  set  aside  by  any  argument  whatever. 

You  admit  that  "  in  two  or  three  species  a  progeny  has  been  pro- 
duced, where  the  hybrids  were  fertile  for  a  few  generations,  and  then 
became  sterile."  And  at  the  close  of  your  inquiry  you  exclaim  of  your 
opponents — "  have  they  gone  farther  than  merely  to  indulge  in  specula- 
tion and  conjectures,  and  in  endeavoring  to  throw  the  shadows  of  doubt 
on  opinions  long  entertained  by  the  world  of  naturalists  ?"  These  re- 
marks appear  to  me  to  be  incompatible  with  each  other ;  and  in  order 
to  prov  e  it,  and  at  the  same  time  to  bring  forward  some  facts  obtained 
since  my  essay  was  published,  I  propose,  in  the  next  place,  to  state  and 
defend  each  of  my  six  propositions  as  originally  announced. 

1.  A  latent  power  of  hybridity  exists  in  many  animals  in  the  wild 
state,  in  which  state,  also,  hybrids  are  sometimes  produced. 

By  a  latent  power  of  hybridity  in  the  wild  state,  I  mean  a  power  that 
seems  only  to  be  evolved  by  domestication.  For  example,  the  several 
species  of  Hoccos,  (genus  Crax)  unite  freely  with  each  other  in  Holland ; 
and  yet  there  is  no  proof  that  they  do  so  in  their  native  forests  of  South 
America.  And  I  believe  the  same  remark  holds  good  with  respect  to 
the  common  fowl ;  yet  Temminck  has  shown  that  no  less  than  five  spe- 
cies of  this  genus  (Gallus]  produce  freely  with  each  other  in  the  domes- 
ticated state.f 

That  some  animals,  in  a  wild  state,  intermix  with  each  other  and  pro- 
duce a  hybrid  offspring,  is  now  admitted  by  every  candid  observer.  I 
have  heretofore  recorded  abundant  evidence  under  this  head,  nor  does  it 

*  De  Animalibus,  lib.  viii.,  28. 

f  Gallus  bankiva,  G.  giganteus,  G.  morio,  G.  crispus  and  G.  furcatus.  He  adds 
that  G.  lanatus  produces  with  the  otherB  a  sterile  progeny. — Pigeons  et  Gallinaces, 
II.,  p.  275,  276. 


9 

seem  necessary  to  add  to  it.  Some  further  examples,  however,  may  not 
be  inappropriate  on  the  present  occasion. 

You  yourself  inform  me  that  you  have  in  your  possession  the  mounted 
skins  of  two  hybrid  hares,  between  the  American  gray  rabbit,  Lepus  syl- 
vaticus,  and  the  marsh  hare,  Lepus  palustris.  In  an  obliging  letter  to 
me,  you  make  the  following  remark :  "  At  the  time  of  finding  these  ani- 
mals, I  supposed  they  would  prove  to  belong  to  an  undescribed  species ; 
but  I  am  now  quite  sure  that  they  are  the  hybrid  product  of  the  above 
named  hares."  I  believe  this  is  one  of  the  first  fully  authenticated  ex- 
amples of  hybridity  in  the  wild  state  that  has  been  noticed  on  our 
continent,  and  I  have  great  pleasure  in  referring  to  you  for  the  fact. 

The  species  of  Birds  are  so  vastly  more  numerous  than  those  of 
quadrupeds,  that  it  is  among  these  that  we  should  expect  a  correspond- 
ing frequency  of  hybrid  productions.  In  addition  to  the  extended  series 
embraced  in  my  Essay,  I  now  submit  the  following  additional  examples 
all  of  which  occur  in  the  wild  state. 

The  Tetrao  urogallus,  or  wood-grouse,  breeds  with  the  black-grouse, 

Tetrix,  and  the  hybrids  are  called  in  Sweden  Racklehanen.  It  is, 
indeed,  so  common  in  that  country  and  in  Norway  that  among  a  single 
lot  of  grouse  brought  thence  to  London  for  sale,  Mr.  Yarrell  detected 
no  less  than  seven  of  these  hybrids.  It  was  long  regarded  by  natural- 
ists as  a  distinct  species  under  the  name  of  Tetrao  medius*  but  it  is 
now  pretty  generally  admitted  to  be  a  mule  bird.  I  have  examined 
two  of  them  in  the  Wilson  Collection,  in  the  Academy  of  Natural  Sci- 
ences of  Philadelphia  ;  and  similar  examples  are  common  in  all  ornitho- 
logical cabinets. 

The  celebrated  Temminck,  however,  considers  the  Tetrao  medius  a 
true  species  independently  of  its  exterior  characteristics  :  first,  because 
it  is  produced  in  the  wild  state,  and  secondly,  because  the  forests  of 
northern  Europe,  in  which  it  is  found,  are  equally  peopled  by  both  the 
species  of  which  this  bird  is  the  supposed  hybrid.  But  these  objections 
are  no  longer  availing ;  for  the  concurrent  testimony  of  all  the  later 
ornithologists  proves  this  bird  to  be  a  mixture  of  two  species,  and  con- 
firms the  opinion  of  Linnoeus,  published  a  century  ago  and  expressed 
in  his  name  of  Tetrao  hybridus.  It  would  be  difficult  to  prove  that 
these  cross  breeds  are  prolific  inter  se,  but  that  they  are  so  with  the 
parent  stock  may  be  safely  inferred  from  the  many  grades  of  interme- 
diate plumage  ;  and  it  is  a  curious  fact  that  Klein,  in  his  ova  avium, 

*  Pigeons  et  Gallinaces,  iii.,  131. 


10 

(Leipsic,  1766,)  has  figured  what  is  supposed  to  be  the  egg  of  this  birdr 
because  its  markings  are  made  up  of  those  of  both  original  species. 

The  following  species  also  produce  hybrids  in  the  wild  state:  the 
Black  grouse,  Tetrao  tetrix,  with  the  English  pheasant,*  the  T.  tetrix 
with  the  T.  subalpina,\  and  the  T.  urogallus  with  the  T.  scoticus. 

The  hooded  crow  pairs  and  produces  with  the  carrion  crow,^  and  the 
same  is  true  of  the  two  species  of  circus,  commonly  called  harriers.§ 

So  much  for  my  first  proposition.     I  now  proceed  to  the  second : 

2.  Hybridity  not  only  exists  among  different  species,  but  among  dif. 
ferent  genera,  and  the  cross-breeds  have  been  prolific  in  both  cases. 

In  support  of  the  first  part  of  this  proposition,  that  animals  of  dif- 
ferent species  are  capable  of  producing  prolific  hybrids,  I  shall  now  add 
the  celebrated  experiments  of  Buffon,  which  were  omitted  from  my 
Essay  for  the  simple  reason  that  I  could  not,  at  the  time  of  writing  it, 
obtain  an  authentic  account  of  them. 

1.  Buffon  brought  together  a  cur-dog  and  a  she- wolf,  and  the  result 
of  this  union  was  a  litter  of  four  pups,  two  male  and  two  female.     No 
difficulty  occurred  in  procuring  this  cross. 

2.  A  male  and  female  of  the  first  generation  were  coupled,  and  four 
pups  were  born,  of  which  two  lived  to  maturity — a  male  and  a  female. 

3.  This  second  generation  crossed,  and  produced  a  generation  of  seven 
pups. 

4.  A  female  of  the  third  generation  was  crossed  by  her  sire,  and  four 
pups  were  produced,  of  which  a  male  and  a  female  lived.)] 

With  these  facts  the  history  ceases  ;  not  from  any  difficulty,  it  would 
seem,  between  the  animals  themselves,  but  on  account  of  the  constant 
care  requisite  to  prevent  the  union  of  the  common  dog  with  these 
hybrids,  so  that  the  experiment  became  fatiguing  after  its  continuance 
for  several  years,  and  it  was  discontinued  on  that  account.  It  thus 
appears  that  the  dog  and  wolf  bred  inter  se  through  three  generations ; 
nor  was  either  one  of  the  parent  animals  permitted  to  unite  with  the 
pure  hybrid  until  the  fourth  generation. 

The  young  animals,  says  Buffon,  both  in  number  and  strength  of 
constitution,  compared  well  with  other  dogs — for  those  that  did  not 
attain  to  adult  age  were  mostly  killed  by  some  accident,  and  not  by 

*  YarrelL    British  Birds,  pp.  307  312. 

|  Nilsson.     Ornithologia  Suecica,  p.  303. 

|  Proceedings  of  the  Zoological  Society  of  London,  1836. 

§  Yarrell.     Ut  Supra,  iL,  p.  87. 

|  Buffon.      Ut  supra,  xxii,  p.  257-320. 


11 

disease.  Nor  is  there  any  circumstance  connected  with  these  experi- 
ments to  cause  a  doubt  that,  had  it  been  continued  with  equal  care,  and 
on  an  enlarged  scale,  these  hybrids  would  have  multiplied  to  an  indefi- 
nite extent. 

But  does  it  not  occur  to  you  that  this  experiment,  with  all  its  pre- 
cautionary attendants,  was  a  faulty  one  ?  And  why  ?  Because  it  was 
on  too  small  a  scale  to  afford  a  fair  chance  of  complete  success.  We 
may  readily  conceive  that  the  result  would  have  been  far  more  satisfac- 
tory, if  the  offspring  of  several  couples  of  the  dog  and  wolf  had  been 
obtained  and  allowed  to  mix  with  each  other. 

How  comes  it,  then,  you  will  inquire,  that  there  is  no  new  race  de- 
rived from  the  dog  and  wolf,  or  the  dog  and  fox  ?  I  answer,  because 
they  are  not  wanted.  Wolves  and  foxes  are  destroyed  without  mercy ; 
and  such  also  has  been  the  fate,  as  we  have  already  shown,  of  those 
animals  which  have  accidentally  resulted  from  their  mixture  with  the 
common  dog.  The  experiment  has  never  been  tried  except  from  mere 
curiosity  ;  and  its  success  has  been  complete  when  we  consider  the  dis- 
advantages by  which  it  was  surrounded  ;  for  the  mere  process  of  breed- 
ing in  and  in,  from  the  progeny  of  a  single  pair  of  any  animal,  has  by 
uniform  experience  tended  to  deterioration  and  extinction.  On  this 
point  I  purpose  to  make  some  remarks  in  the  sequel. 

I  presume  that  the  facts  just  mentioned,  together  with  those  cited  in 
my  Essay  from  both  quadrupeds  and  birds,  are  sufficient  to  establish,  be- 
yond cavil,  the  simple  fact — that  animals  of  different  species  are  capable 
of  producing  a  fertile  hybrid  offspring. 

Now  for  the  second  part  of  my  first '  proposition — that  animals  be- 
longing to  different  genera  do  also  unite  with  like  results.  I  consider 
myself  sufficiently  sustained  in  this  instance  by  the  facts  already 
adduced  with  respect  to  the  sheep  and  the  goat.  I  have  the  testimony 
of  Buffbn,  Cuvier  and  Chevreul  that  the  progeny  is  fertile  ;  nor  does 
any  one  of  these  authorities  state  that  the  hybrids  will  not  reproduce 
inter  se  ;  and  M.  Chevreul  notices  the  necessity  of  admitting  one  of 
the  parent  animals  merely  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  a  finer  fleece. 

I  do  not  abandon  the  asserted  fertile  hybrids  between  the  Marten, 
Mustela  martes,  and  the  common  cat.  I  am  willing  with  yourself  to 
receive  the  statement  with  caution  ;  but  the  details  are  too  explicit  to 
permit  us  to  deny  them  without  further  investigation. 

The  only  example  of  this  class  of  hybrids  that  has  occurred  in  my 
readings  since  my  Essay  was  published,  is  that  of  the  Thrush,  (Merula 
vulgaris)  and  Blackbird,  (Turdus  merula,)  which  have  been  observed  to 


12 

pair  in  England,  and  to  produce  strongly  marked  hybrids  during  two 
successive  years.  * 

3.  Domestication  does  not  cause  this  faculty,  but  merely  evolves  it. 
This  is  a  self-evident  proposition,  as  the  preceding  facts  amply  testify ; 

and  my  reasons  for  bringing  it  forward  were  to  show,  that  what  Tem- 
minck  and  Prichard  have  termed  the  natural  repugnance  of  different 
species  to  intermingle,  has  many  exceptions ;  and  further,  that  Dr. 
Prichard  is  not  correct  when  he  assumes  the  law  of  the  case  to  be  that 
this  repugnance  is  "  overcome  in  the  state  of  domestication,  in  which  the 
natural  propensities  cease,  in  a  great  measure,  to  direct  their  actions." 
This  is  one  of  the  several  postulates  respecting  hybridity,  that  must 
now  be  abandoned;  for  the  evidence  I  have  given  is  conclusive 
against  it. 

4.  The  capacity  for  fertile  hybridity,  cceteris  paribus,  exists  in  ani- 
mals in  proportion  to  their  aptitude  for  domesticity  and  cultivation. 

This  proposition,  like  the  preceding  one,  is  an  obvious  truth,  requiring 
no  further  elucidation ;  and  man,  in  the  language  of  Blumenbach,  being 
the  most  perfect  of  animals,  this  faculty  is  perhaps  the  most  perfectly 
evolved  in  him.  I  reserve  some  remarks  on  this  subject  for  the  sequel. 

5.  Since  various  Afferent    species  of   animals   are  capable   of  pro- 
ducing toyether  a  prolific  hybrid  offspring,  hybridity  ceases  to  be  a  test 
of  specific  affiliation. 

This  proposition  is  certainly  borne  out  by  the  facts  above  stated,  and 
by  those  of  my  Essay.  I  do  not  deny  that  the  aeneral  law  of  Nature  is 
opposed  to  the  remoter  degrees  of  hybridity ;  but  the  exceptions  are  so 
remarkable,  even  with  regard 'to  these,  that  they  invalidate  the  rule. 

6.  Consequently,  the  mere  fact   that   the  several  races  of  Mankind, 
produce  with  each  other  a  more  or  less  fertile  progeny,  constitutes,  in 
itself,  no  proof  of  the  unity  of  the  human  species. 

Your  strictures  do  not  show  me  the  necessity  of  relinquishing,  or  even 
of  modifying,  any  one  of  these  propositions ;  but  there  are  some  differ- 
ences of  opinion  between  us,  and  I  next  proceed,  as  briefly  as  possible, 
to  examine  them  ;  not  with  a  view  to  criticise  the  belief  of  others,  but 
merely  to  state  my  own  convictions  on  a  subject  which  has  occupied  no 
small  share  of  inquiry  and  reflection. 

Hybridity  is  divisible  into  four  degrees  or  grades,  which  may  be  ex- 
plained in  the  following  manner. 

The  first  degree  is  that  in  which  the  hybrids  never  re-produce  ;  in 

*  Barry,  in  Mag.  of  Nat.  Hist.  voL  viii.,  quoted  by  Mr.  Yarrell. 


13 

other  words,  the  mixed  progeny  begins  and  ends  with  the  first  cross.  A 
large  proportion  of  the  known  mixed  breeds  belong  to  this  class,  and 
they  embrace  animals  of  entirely  different  genera.  Several  of  them 
have  been  indicated  in  the  foregoing  pages  ;  and  for  some  curious  infor- 
mation on  this  head,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  researches  of  M.  Selys- 
Longchamps,  who  has  recorded  authenticated  examples  of  hybrids  of 
twenty-four  crosses  between  different  species  of  swan,  goose  and  duck, 
all  of  which  proved  sterile  excepting  those  between  Anser  cygnoides  and 
A.  cinereus,  Cygnus  olor  and  C.  mutabilis,  and  Anas  bo&chas  and  A. 
acuta*  Indeed,  nearly  all  domesticated  birds,  however  different  in 
generic  relations,  are  capable  of  producing  a  mule  offspring  by  mingling 
with  each  other. 

The  second  degree  of  hybridity  is  that  in  which  the  hybrids,  whether 
generic  or  specific,  are  incapable  of  re-producing  inter  se,  but  multiply, 
to  any  extent,  by  uniting  the  hybrid  with  a  full-blood  animal  of  either 
of  the  parent  stocks.  The  American  bison,  Bos  Americanus,  re-pro" 
duces  in  this  way  with  the  common  breed  of  cattle,  as  you  have  fully 
shown  ;  and  Kalni,  the  Swedish  traveller,  states  that  these  animals 
mixed  with  each  other  independently  of  the  influence  of  domestication. 

The  same  remark  is  true  with  respect  to  all  the  known  species  of  the 
genus  Bos,  whether  in  Asia,  Africa  or  America  ;  and  this  second  remove 
from  the  original  stock,  is  capable,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  goes,  of 
breeding  inter  se  and  without  limit,  provided  a  sufficient  number  of  hy- 
brids of  the  same  grade  are  brought  together,  to  prevent  the  stock  from 
being  destroyed  by  too  close  inter-breeding.  Races  might  be  formed 
and  perpetuated  in  this  way,  were  they  worth  the  trouble  ;  but  this  not 
being  the  case,  the  hybrids  are  permitted  to  breed  with  the  parent 
stocks,  in  which  they  soon  become  lost,  on  account  of  the  great  prepon- 
derance of  individuals  of  those  stocks.  The  several  species  of  goats,  as 
we  have  seen,  belong  to  this  class  of  hybrid-forming  animals.  So  also 
various  other  animals  capable  of  domestication,  as  I  have  already  pointed 
out,  especially  in  my  Essay.  I  will  now  only  add  two  other  examples. 
Two  species  of  ferrets,  Mustelafuro  and  M.  putorius,  are  often  crossed 
in  England,  in  order  to  obtain  improved  breeds  ;f  and  two  doves,  the 
common  turtle,  Columba  turtur,  and  the  collared  turtle,  (7.  risoria, 
though  specifically  and  remarkably  different  from  each  other,  unite  to- 
gether, and,  according  to  Beckstein,  produce  fruitful  hybrids.  J 

*  Hybrides  des  Anatidees.     Bulletin  de  1'Acad.  Roy.  de  Bruxellos.     T.  XII. 
f  Bewick.     Quadrupeds,  p.  252. 
\  Singing  Birds,  p.  287. 


14 

The  third  degree  of  hybridity  is  that  in  which  animals  of  unquestion- 
ably distinct  species,  unite  and  produce  a  progeny  that  is  prolific  inter 
se.  Such  is  the  case  with  respect  to  the  dog  and  wolf  in  the  experi- 
ments of  Buffon  ;  and  such  also,  I  believe,  was  the  result  in  the  dog  and 
fox,  as  coupled  by  John  Hunter,  and  in  the  dog  and  jackal,  as  obtained 
by  others.  Several  species  of  birds  further  illustrate  this  proposition  ; 
although  the  examples  are  very  limited,  and,  as  we  have  heretofore  ad- 
mitted, contrary  to  the  general  law  of  nature.  If  Buffon's  statement, 
therefore,  is  true,  (and  no  one  has  ever  questioned  it,  and  it  appears  to 
have  been  accomplished  to  his  own  surprise  and  even  to  his  regret)  then 
his  aphorism  is  not  true,  viz  :  that  all  animals  capable  of  producing  an 
offspring  which  can  again  re-produce  among  themselves,  are  necessarily 
of  the  same  species. 

"  We  may  take  the  law  of  sterility  in  the  commixture  of  different 
species,"  observes  Hamilton  Smith,  "  to  have  its  limits  where  the  forms 
cease  to  be  sufficiently  homogeneous  ;  a  law  unquestionably  ordained  for 
the  wisest  purposes,  but  marked  by  exceptional  modifications  for  pur- 
poses not  less  beneficent."* 

This  may  be  received  as  an  axiom  in  science ;  and  I  further  believe, 
with  Azzara,f  that  many  species  or  varieties  of  animals  are  so  entirely 
homogeneous  in  their  organization,  that,  although  distinct  in  their  ori- 
gin, they  have  been  endowed  with  a  faculty  of  fertile  intermixture,  which 
is  rapidly  and  almost  interminably  evolved  by  domestication ;  whence 
arises 

The  fourth  degree  of  hybridity.  This  phenomenon  is  characteristic  of 
man,  the  ox  tribe,  horses,  sheep,  goats,  dogs,  etc. ;  thus  embracing  the 
head  of  the  zoological  series,  and  those  animals  most  essential  to  his 
wants  and  his  happiness. 

I  am  well  aware  that,  to  use  your  own  phrase,  you  will  "  join  issue" 
with  me  on  these  points.  They  are  matters  of  opinion  ;  you  have  yours, 
I  have  mine.  I  believe  in  a  plurality  of  origin  for  the  human  species  ; 
that  they  were  created,  not  in  one  pair,  but  in  many  pairs ;  and  that 
they  were  adapted,  from  the  beginning,  to  those  varied  circumstances  of 
climate  and  locality  which,  while  congenial  to  some,  are  destructive  to 
others.  Hence  the  differences  in  their  physical  characteristics,  and  in 
their  mental  and  moral  endowments.  It  would  be  impossible  in  the 
limited  space  allotted  to  this  communication,  to  examine  and  discuss  a 
question  involving  so  many  facts,  both  direct  and  collateral ;  but  I  must 
be  permitted  briefly  to  "  define  my  position"  in  reference  to  it. 

I  commenced  the  study  of  Ethnology  about  twenty  years  since  ;  and 

*  Equidie,  p.  'JO.  f  Quadrupeds,  I.,  p.  95. 


among  the  first  aphorisms  taught  me  by  all  the  books  to  which  I  then 
had  access,  was  this — that  all  mankind  were  derived  from  a  single  pair ; 
and  that  the  diversities  now  so  remarkable,  originated  solely  from  the 
operations  of  climate,  locality,  food  and  other  physical  agents.  In  other 
words,  that  man  was  created  a  perfect  and  beautiful  being  in  the  first  in- 
stance, and  that  chance,  chance  alone  has  caused  all  the  physical  disparity 
among  men,  from  the  noblest  Caucasian  form  to  the  most  degraded  Aus- 
tralian and  Hottentot. 

I  approached  the  subject  as  one  of  great  difficulty  and  delicacy  ;  and 
my  first  convictions  were,  that  these  diversities  are  not  acquired,  but  have 
existed  ab  origine.  Such  is  the  opinion  expressed  in  my  Crania  Ameri- 
cana ;  but  at  that  period,  (twelve  years  ago)  I  had  not  investigated  scrip- 
tural Ethnology,  and  was  content  to  suppose  that  the  distinctive  charac- 
teristics of  the  several  races  had  been  marked  upon  the  immediate  fami- 
ly of  Adam. 

Further  investigation,  however,  in  connection  with  zoological  science, 
has  led  me  to  take  a  wider  view  of  this  question,  of  which  an  outline  is 
given  above  ;  but  I  never  fully  adopted  and  announced  this  conviction 
until  I  felt  fully  satisfied  that  it  was  in  harmony  with  the  Sacred  Text, 
and  reconcileable  with  the  sublime  teachings  of  Genesis.* 

Thus  in  common  with  many  other  inquirers,  I  regard  the  first  chapter 
of  that  book  to  give  what  may  be  called  a  generic  or  general  account  of 
the  creation  of  Man  ;  and  this  is  expressed  in  precisely  the  same  terms 
which  are  iised  in  reference  to  the  other  classes  of  animals, — "  male  and 
female  created  he  them," — without  reference  to  the  number  or  locality. 
If  we  next  examine  the  second  chapter  of  Genesis  we  find  another  ac- 
count of  the  creation  of  man  in  and  for  a  particular  region  ;  and  it 
further  appears  that  even  the  vegetable  kingdom  was  at  the  same  time 
provided  with  additional  elements,  in  order  to  render  this  locality  yet 
more  emphatically  a  paradise  for  the  Adamic  race,  and  not  a  collective 
centre  for  the  whole  human  family. 

To  show  that  the  evidence  of  facts  tends  strongly  to  this  view  of  the 
case,  and  to  prove  that  it  is  not  at  variance  with  the  record  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch, I  beg  leave  to  quote  a  short  passage  from  the  writings  of  a  cler- 
gyman remarkable  alike  for  his  erudition,  his  piety  and  his  clear  per- 
ception of  the  relative  position  of  science  and  revealed  religion. 

"If  the  two  first  inhabitants  of  Eden  were  the  progenitors,  not  of  all 
human  beings,  but  only  of  the  races,  whence  sprung  the  Hebrew  family, 
still  it  would  remain  the  fact,  that  all  were  formed  by  the  immediate 

*  Amer.  Journal  of  Science  and  the  Arts,  1847. 


16 

power  of  God,  and  all  their  circumstances,  stated  or  implied  in  the 
Scriptures,  would  remain  the  same  as  to  moral  and  practical  purposes. 

"  Some  difficulties  in  the  Scripture  history  would  be  taken  away — 
such  as  the  sons  of  Adam  obtaining  wives  who  were  their  own  sisters ; 
Cain's  acquiring  instruments  of  husbandry,  which  must  have  been  supplied 
by  miracle  immediately  from  heaven,  upon  the  usual  supposition  ;  his 
apprehensions  of  summary  punishment ;  his  fleeing  into  another  region, 
of  which  Joseph  us  so  understands  the  text  as  to  affirm  that  Cain  ob- 
tained confederates  and  became  a  plunderer  and  a  robber,  implying  the 
existence  of  a  population  beyond  his  own  family ;  and  his  building  a 
'  city,'  a  considerable  collection  of  habitations. 

"Thus,  if  contrary  to  all  reasonable  probability,  this  great  question 
should  ever  be  determined  in  the  way  opposite  to  what  we  now  think 
the  verdict  of  truth,  the  highest  interests  of  man  will  not  be  affected."* 

Thus  we  see  that  this  eminent  biblical  scholar,  although  himself  dis- 
posed to  adopt  the  "  Unity  doctrine,"  finds  no  difficulty  in  the  converse 
of  it;  which  last,  I  think,  is  fully  sustained  by  a  critical  examination  of 
the  other  sections  of  the  zoological  series.  But  circumstances  preclude 
the  expression,  in  this  place,  of  the  facts  and  arguments  of  the  case, 
which  I  reserve  for  another  occasion.  Thus  much,  however,  seems 
necessary  to  be  said,  because  mankind,  both  naturalists  and  others,  have 
kept  aloof  from  Ethnology,  in  the  fear  that  its  study  would  bring  them 
into  collision  with  the  Mosaic  record. 

A  few  words  on  another  point.  Many  zoologists  insist  on  the  origin 
of  all  animals  from  a  single  pair  of  each  species;  so  that  all  the  dogs, 
for  example,  with  their  many  and  remarkable  varieties,  must  have  been 
derived  from  one  male  and  one  female,  while  chance  or  accident  are 
appealed  to  in  explanation  of  their  diversities  of  form,  color  and  instinct. 

Now  I  can  find  nothing  in  the  account  of  creation,  as  contained  in 
the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  to  sustain  a  doctrine  of  this  kind  ;  and  if  it 
be  said  that  they  entered  the  ark  in  pairs,  I  have  two  replies  to  make : 

1st.  That  geology  proves  the  Deluge  to  have  been  a  local  phenome- 
non; and  this  is  the  almost  unanimous  verdict  of  those  persons  who  have 
studied  that  cataclysm  in  connection  with  the  fossiliferous  strata  ;  and 
I  here  again  refer  to  the  work  of  Dr.  J.  Pye  Smith,  for  a  full  exposition 
of  the  evidence. 

*  Rev.  J.  Pye  Smith,  D.D.,  L.L.D.  Relation  between  the  Holy  Scriptures  and 
Geology,  p.  398-400.  3d  editioa 

I  regard  this  among  the  most  instructive  volumes  that  has  issued  from  the  press 
since  the  revival  of  letters,  and  for  this  reason — that  it  constitutes  a  link  between 
religion  and  natural  science — studies  which  have  hitherto  been  as  isolated  as  if 
they  were  incompatible  with  each  other.  Mr.  Robert  E.  Peterson,  of  Philadelphia, 
has  the  work  in  press,  and  will  shortly  publish  it  in  a  style  not  inferior  to  the  Eng- 
lish edition. 


17 

2d.  Some  animals  are  said  to  have  been  received  into  the  ark  by 
pairs,  others  by  sevens,  and  among  the  latter  were  all  birds  and  all  clean 
beasts.  Did  it  never  occur  to  you  that,  with  this  range  between  two 
and  seven,  the  text  might  be  safely  interpreted  at  least  two  ?  Even  if 
we  suppose,  (what,  however,  is  not  necessary  to  a  proper  interpretation 
of  Genesis,)  that  no  animals  survived  the  Deluge  but  those  received  into 
the  Ark,  we  may  reasonably  infer  that  all  varieties  of  domestic  animals, 
even  those  not  strictly  clean,  would  have  been  preserved  on  account  of 
their  usefulness  to  man  ?  Buffon  describes,  if  I  mistake  not,  thirty  differ- 
ent varieties  of  dogs,  (many  of  which  may  be  regarded  as  true  species,*) 
and  some  of  these  are  proved  by  Egyptian  monuments  to  be  as  old  as 
the  period  ascribed  to  the  Deluge  by  the  Hebrew  chronology.  Why 
were  not  these  forms  in  part,  at  least,  primeval  ?  Again,  you  will  ob- 
serve, on  reference  to  Pye  Smith's  researches,  that  there  is  great  proba- 
bility that  the  Ark  contained  few  or  no  animals  but  those  capable  of 
domestication. 

With  respect  to  the  origin  of  the  human  race  by  a  single  pair,  I  al- 
ways felt  that  there  was  a  moral  objection  to  it;  and  I  read  the  Sacred 
Text  with  much  more  satisfaction  since  I  am  convinced  that  it  does  not 
require  the  interpretation  usually  put  upon  it. 

There  is,  again,  a  physiological  objection  to  the  propagation  of  any 
animals  from  a  single  pair,  because  this  incestuous  intercourse  tends 
eventually  to  the  deterioration  and  extinction  of  the  races  that  are  sub- 
jected to  it.  I  do  not  believe  that  the  earth  could  ever  have  been  fur- 
nished with  animals  on  this  plan,  unless  a  miracle  had  been  wrought  at 
every  stage  of  it.  The  process  of  breeding  in  and  in  is  extremely  diffi- 
cult and  often  impossible.  Sir  John  Sebright  and  others  have  proved 
this  on  a  large  scale  with  respect  to  domestic  animals  \  and  the  same 
fact  is  equally  familiar  in  this  country.  Azara  states  that  the  natives 
of  Paraguay  have  found  from  experience  that  their  cattle  gradually  di- 
minish in  size,  and  lose  their  fecundity,  unless  fresh  animals  of  both 
sexes  are  introduced,  from  time  to  time  from  other  pastures  than  their 
own  ;f  and  Mr.  Alexander  Walker,  after  a  laborious  examination  of 
this  question,  declares  that  by  this  process  "  nearly  perfect  beings 
would  eventually  degenerate."  Here,  then,  even  among  our  domestic 
animals,  we  have  a  degree  of  that  same  difficulty  that  is  proverbial 
among  admitted  hybrids.  As  to  man,  let  us  suppose  the  mulatto  offspring 

*  Species — a  primordial  organic  form. — S.  G.  M. 
I  Quadrupeds  of  Paraguay,  p.  23 


18 

of  a  black  man  and  a  white  woman  (or  the  reverse)  were  compelled  to 
marry  among  themselves,  without  any  access  of  other  individuals  of 
either  race,  how  long  do  you  suppose  this  mixed  breed  would  last  ? 
Not  beyond  the  third  or  fourth  generation. 

I  repeat  my  matured  conviction  that  the  different  species  of  animals 
were  created  in  their  allotted  regions  of  the  earth, — the  kangaroo  in 
New  Holland,  the  sloth  in  Brazil.  They  did  not  appear  on  the  earth 
in  pairs,  but  in  many  pairs,  some  more,  some  less.  A  few  elephants 
might  serve  to  stock  a  continent  j  but  when  Prof.  Baily  informs  me 
that  hundreds  of  millions  of  Polythalmia,  (each  one  as  truly  organized 
as  an  elephant)  exist  in  a  single  cubic  inch  of  the  sea  mud  of  our  own 
coast,  it  strikes  me  as  very  absurd  to  suppose  that  they  have  been  de- 
rived from  a  single  pair,  or  had  their  origin  in  Mesopotamia.  The  views 
I  here  advance  are  those  of  Azara,  Swainson,  Hamilton  Smith,  Agassiz 
and  several  other  eminent  zoologists.  The  recent  judicious  observa- 
tions of  Prof.  Agassiz  on  this  question,  in  the  Christian  Examiner, 
preclude  the  necessity  of  any  further  remarks  on  my  part ;  and  I  shall 
conclude  what  I  have  to  say  on  this  head  in  the  words  of  St.  Augustine: 
"  If  animals/'  says  he,  "have  not  been  brought  to  remote  islands  by 
angels,  or  perhaps  by  the  inhabitants  of  continents  addicted  to  the  chase, 
they  must  have  been  spontaneously  produced  on  the  earth;"  or  in  other 
words,  in  the  localities  where  we  now  find  them.  It  is  difficult  for  me 
to  imagine  that  a  practical  zoologist  can  entertain  a  contrary  opinion. 

It  is  one  of  the  weaknesses  of  mankind  to  delight  in  mystery,  and  to 
be  perpetually  looking  for  miracles.  They  forget  or  disregard  the  fact 
that  the  laws  of  Nature  were  ordained  of  God,  and  that  a  special  inter- 
position at  every  step  would  disjoint  the  mighty  mechanism  and  mar 
the  harmony  of  creation. 

I  am  convinced  that  the  more  we  study  the  Mosaic  history  in  connec- 
tion with  Natural  Science,  the  more  we  shall  be  instructed  by  both.  Is 
our  faith  shaken  because  Grallileo  has  shown  that  the  sun  does  not  re- 
volve round  the  earth,  but  the  earth  round  the  sun  ?  Does  it  detract 
from  our  admiration  of  Creative  Wisdom  to  be  told,  as  Geology  teaches, 
that  past  time  is  an  eternity  ?  Should  it  lessen  our  admiration  of  the 
past,  or  our  hope  in  the  future,  to  be  told  that  mankind  have  existed 
thousands  of  centuries*  upon  the  earth?  Or  does  our  religion  suffer  de- 
triment because  the  great  Lepsius  has  deciphered  the  legends  of  Memphis, 

*  "Beyond  that  event  (the  arrival  of  Abraham  in  Palestine)  we  can  never  know 
how  many  centuries,  nor  how  many  chiliads  of  years  may  have  elapsed  since  the 
first  man  of  clay  received  the  image  of  God  and  the  breath  of  life." — Prichard. 


19 

and  proved  that  they  date  back  three  thousand  five  hundred  years  before 
Christ  ?  Yet  these  things  are  true  ;  and  if  the  pride  of  man  feels  hu- 
miliated at  his  past  ignorance,  let  him  be  thankful  that  he  has  yet  lived 
to  see  so  much  light. 

In  conclusion,  I  feel  that  I  owe  you  an  apology  for  this  very  long  and 
very  diffuse  communication,  which  has  been  written  amid  the  exacting 
duties  of  an  arduous  profession.  I  have  taken  this  occasion  to  publish 
some  facts  and  to  express  some  opinions  which  I  had  designed  for  a 
supplement  to  my  Essay  on  Hybridity,  and  I  shall  now  leave  the  further 
investigation  of  the  subject  to  other  and  abler  hands. 
I  remain,  my  dear  sir, 

Very  faithfully  your  friend  and  servant, 

SAMUEL  GEORGE  MORTON. 

P.  S.  After  I  had  made  considerable  progress  in  the  preceding  letter 
I  met  with  a  copy  of  your  work  on  the  "  Unity  of  the  Human  Species," 
which,  with  all  the  interest  of  its  facts  and  the  ingenuity  of  its  argu- 
ment, would  lead  me  to  suppose  that  Ethnology  has  stood  still  while  all 
the  other  sciences  have  made  such  remarkable  advances.  Ethnology 
must  hereafter  be  studied  in  connection  with  general  zoology,  geology 
and  chronology ;  and  even  astronomy,  in  the  hands  of  such  men  as 
Humboldt  and  Lepsius,  is  a  collateral  aid  of  great  value. 


UCSB  LIBRARY 

X 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

305  De  Neve  Drive  -  Parking  Lot  17  •  Box  951388 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA  90095-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library  from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


000  61 1  063     9 


Universi 

South 

Libr; 


